Modern life is built upon the knowledge that the scientific community has gathered and that society — markets, governments, workers — put to use. We have our ancestors to thank.

But will our descendants thank us? Have we put to good use the knowledge we are gaining today to help those who will come after us?

That question is now before one of the highest courts of the United States. As a scientist who has spent the past half-century documenting how mankind is fundamentally altering our climate, I fear that unless the courts understand the threat and require the government to produce a plan of action, the answer of history could be damning.

In a new study, I and my co-authors make indisputably clear what the world’s scientists have increasingly warned: Our climate is changing, and the impacts are growing. The changes harm humans and threaten other life on the planet.

Well, the paper makes clear that’s what Homer thinks, but, what he thinks and what is true do not intersect.

Our study, published in the prestigious peer-reviewed science journal PLOS-ONE, was written in support of a lawsuit against the federal government. The plaintiffs are young people, those to whom we are handing an increasingly warmer and destabilized planet.

This is probably the greatest disservice to humanity (there are many) which the alarmist do. They actually try to convince people that we can control our climate, and that there was a point in time in which our climate was fair and nice and safe. There was never a point in time in which people can point to as our climate being fair and nice and safe, save for what is written of the Garden of Eden.

They argue that they have a constitutional right to a safe climate, that they have a right to receive from us a planet that supports all life, just as our forebears gave us. It is correctly a legal argument, but it relates to a fundamental moral question.

This is hysterical claptrap. I can just picture our forefathers remembering Valley Forge, and including a constitutional right to a “safe climate”. As far as supporting all life, the planet today supports more life than it ever had in the past.

We know without a doubt that gases we are adding to the air have caused a planetary energy imbalance and global warming, already 0.8 degrees Celsius since pre-industrial times. This warming is driving an increase in extreme weather, from heat waves and droughts to wildfires and stronger storms (though mistakenly expecting science to instantly document links to specific events misses the forest for the trees).

The problem, of course, is that none of that is true. Our storms are not stronger. Our droughts and wild fires are not increasing. Where the sparse data is available, they are decreasing. The rest is utter conjecture by lunatics of similar ilk as Homer. Further, attribution to the imagined 0.8 C warming is in high dispute as to how much can be laid at humanities feet, not that this should ever be a concern. Life thrives much better in warming climates rather than cooler ones. It has always been that way on earth, and it will always be.

More than simply listing calamitous threats, we wanted to jump-start the discussion of how the world can take significant action. Now.

First, the good news. We still have time to choose. Will we seek out and exploit ever deeper and dirtier fossil fuels or phase in cleaner carbon-free energy? If we start aggressively reducing carbon emissions, we can stabilize our climate and avoid cataclysmic change. Our fate truly is in our hands.

Laughable, for the past 30 years, we’ve almost been out of time. We get more reprieves than a death roe inmate in California. But, the most egregious lie, and one in which I believe can be actionable in a court of law is the lie Homer spews about being able to “stabilize” our climate. I believe, now, we can clearly make the case that Hansen, and like minded Malthusian Marxist misanthropists have abused their free speech to the point of the figurative shouting “fire in a crowded theater”. Even this humble blog has collected the available data for most of the lunatics’ babbling points and the empirical data has refuted their claims. From droughts to fires to hurricanes to tornadoes to snow and ice coverage, none of their lunacy has bore to be true. And, the damage their advocacy has done, while it can’t entirely be quantified, certainly, some loss of treasure can be. If we can’t criminally charge these lunatics, we certainly can, in class action, demonstrate financial harm. Their advocacy to impoverish people is in and of itself, inhumane.

…. Carbon emissions will decline only if the price of fossil fuels begins to include their costs to society: their effects on human health and climate. Economic analysis shows that a rising carbon fee collected from fossil fuel companies would swiftly drive market innovations and investments in clean energy. (Indeed, many companies are preparing for such a fee.)

…. We must, instead, keep maximum warming close to 1 degree Celsius. Thus, most of the allowed carbon emissions budget has been used up. We must phase out coal emissions. And it would be foolhardy to develop unconventional fossil fuels such as tar sands.

…. In short, our analysis finds that we must act more quickly and more aggressively than politicians and international negotiators have even considered.

…. Climate change is altering people’s lives, right now, from the United States to Africa to the Arctic. It is as clear and present a danger as we’ve ever seen.

This is another great lie told by the lunatics, worse, they know they’re lying to the people. The climate has always changed. Always. And, the changes have always altered people’s lives. Always. There is no more danger in a changing climate today than there ever was, indeed, there’s much less danger today because of our innovations which help us adapt to the ever changing climate.

Science and the knowledge it brings is a gift only if we use it. Failing to act on our knowledge to protect future generations would be the gravest injustice of all.

Homer wouldn’t know science if it up and slapped a brand on his forehead. Real science includes the ability to falsify the thought. Data and empirical evidence is used to do so. Hansen uses neither. And, he knows this. Science is not scary bedtime stories.

Many people miss the big picture with Homer Hansen. It is clear his trolley has left the tracks. But what they fail to realize, that for the grace of his own actions of resigning, he would still be in charge of NASA! Government does not get rid of you just because you are a lunatic. And as Clinton, Waters and holder show, you can even be a felon and not get dismissed. Only voluntary resignation gets rid of the dead weight in government.

I am convinced that they are getting some financial gain for spewing this garbage. Somehow probably tied to Soros, through the Tides foundation, or who knows where ( . .maybe even the UN also . .) , and hidden well ( . . yeah, a ‘cynical conspiracy theory’ , I know . . .). But I just cant see that anyone in their right mind would be continuing to carry on this way unless they were getting something for it. .
Sure would love to see a real investigative journalist try to find it. Nah, that probably wouldn’t work. They would have to know some ‘unseemly types’ who had contacts and access in the Soros/Tides/ etc. financial world and dealings to dig it up . . . and I can’t imagine what might happen to them if they got caught . . .

If you go by potential, just start filtering out Uranium or Thorium out of sea water and use it in a reactor. The Japanese have developed and tested a technique, using large plastic sponges moored in the sea for a year to collect metal ions, doing just that, and it is economical at current Uranium prices. Unfortunately then Fukushima happened and nukes are off in Japan for the time being.